you still just ask yourself: Which follows from which? or: Which makes better sense as a reason for the other?
However, R3 does not so much follow from the previous two claims as join with them to support C. The structure then would be:
R1 & R2 & R3
C
The principle of charity
The rule that says we should interpret a supposed argument in a favourable way – that is, as a good argument rather than a poor one – is known as the principle of charity. Note that despite the name, this doesn’t mean being kind or generous to the author. All it means is that we should assume that the author is a rational individual who
understands the difference between good and bad reasoning at least as well as we do
ourselves. So, if we have in front of us a text that could be understood as ‘X therefore Y’, or as ‘Y therefore X’, and we can see that X is a good reason for believing Y, but Y is not a good reason for believing X, then on the principle of charity we should accept the first interpretation and not the second.
This explains why there is often a slight overlap between analysis and evaluation. We are not just looking for lists of sentences that can be called an argument (however bad), but one which goes some way towards being a good argument. By the same token, if a piece of text makes much better sense as a non-argument than as a argument, we should not just assume it is bad argument.
We shall return to this important principle when we discuss evaluation and counter- arguments in Chapters 4.9 and 7.7.
Complex arguments and multiple
conclusions
The procedure is the same for longer and/or more complex arguments, except that you may have to repeat it for each of the sub-
Look at the next example and answer the multiple-choice question that follows it.
[4] Parents naturally tend to think that, because they are older and more experienced, they know better than their children. They consequently assume that their judgements and decisions are the right ones. But in many ways children are much cleverer than their parents give them credit for. They frequently display problem-solving skills that their parents do not possess; and they are more adventurous in their thinking, if only because they are less afraid of making mistakes. Parents should pay closer attention to what their children have to say, and allow them to make more decisions for
themselves. Apart from anything else, this would help to relieve many unnecessary family tensions.
Which one of the following best expresses the main conclusion of the argument? As well as making your selection, give a brief reason why you think it is right, and why you thought the others were wrong.
A Children are much cleverer than their parents give them credit for, and frequently display problem-solving skills that their parents do not possess. B Parents naturally assume that their
judgements and decisions are the right ones.
C Children don’t mind making mistakes to the extent that their parents generally do.
Commentary
There are multiple-choice questions like this in some but not all critical thinking syllabuses and examination papers, and in some
admissions tests to universities or professions. It is good practice to try some from time to time, and you can find plenty of sample papers with sets of such questions on various examination websites.
Unless you are told otherwise, only one of the options is correct. That is the case here. The other options either correspond to one of the reasons, or to an intermediate conclusion, or to a piece of background information; or they misrepresent the conclusion altogether. Usually in such tests, you are not required to give any explanation or justification for your choice, but because this is a learning activity, you were asked to say why you made the choice you did, and why you rejected the others. (You should always do this when you are using multiple-choice questions to improve your skills.)
So how did you go about the task? Did you read the passage, then immediately look through A–E to find the most promising response? If so, you were asking for trouble. This is not a good strategy. Although the incorrect responses are not designed to trick you, they are designed to make you think. They are called distracters, and with good reason, for it is very easy to be tempted by an answer because it echoes something in the passage, or simply because it ‘sounds right’.
A much safer approach is to ignore the responses A–E completely while you analyse the argument and identify its conclusion yourself; then to look for the response that best
matches your analysis. That way you are not so much looking for an answer as looking for confirmation of your own answer. If you find a response that matches yours, you will have two good reasons for choosing it, not one.
So, what’s the argument here? The passage starts by claiming that parents tend to think they know best and consequently assume their decisions and judgements are the right ones. This has the look of an argument already, but it is clearly not making the author’s own point. For, like the tennis argument in Chapter 2.6, the opening sentences are followed by the word ‘But’, signalling an opposing view. What parents think is therefore just the introduction or target for the real argument.
The author’s own argument stems from the claim that children are often wiser than parents think, supported by observations about their problem-solving skills, and so on. Then comes the recommendation that parents should pay children more attention and allow them to make more decisions. This also looks a likely conclusion, but does it follow from the claim that children are wiser than their parents think, or support it?
Clearly it does follow: the passage is not saying (nor would it make much sense to say) that parents should pay closer attention to their children, and therefore children are wiser than their parents think. So, a full and fair analysis would be:
Context: Parents naturally tend to think that . . . they know better than their children, etc.
But . . .
R1 Children frequently display problem-solving skills that their parents do not possess. R2 They are more adventurous in their
thinking.
IC In many ways children are much cleverer than their parents give them credit for. R3 Paying closer attention etc. would help to
relieve family tensions. D Parents should attend more to what
their children say, and allow them to make more decisions.
E A reduction in family tensions would result if parents listened more to what their children think.
explanatory detail, suggesting why children may be more adventurous. It is not supported by any other claims and is not therefore a conclusion. E comes at the end of the argument, which is a natural place for a conclusion. However, it should have been clear that it is there to give extra support to the argument, and is not its conclusion.
Eliminating A, B, C and E in this way is a worthwhile exercise to reassure yourself that you have made the right choice. But beware of using it as the only way of selecting the correct response. You need to have positive reasons for making your selection as well as negative reasons for rejecting the others.